Cycling/Walking around the city

CramCycle · 28-04-2014 03:03PM

dastardly00 wrote: »

What a nutjob.

I have had the same with an on purpose punishment pass, where the driver overtook me, matched my speed and then pulled in. He then admitted it was to show me how dangerous it was to cycle on the bus lane, same as yourself, empty traffic lanes beside him. Needless to say the Gardai are appreciative that I had it all on camera.

at1withmyself · 28-04-2014 09:00PM

I've yet to get a Bus Driver to stop and get out but have had them open the door and shout about it with passengers aboard

. As soon as they finish the rant I ask them politely if they'd like to discuss the rules of the road, this results in another rant a which point I cycle on. I don't think they should be driving with this much aggression built up!

Report the incident on the Bus Eireann website, they can then highlight it to the driver although I'd also consider notifying the guards if it happens again.

dastardly00 wrote: »

Just thought I'd add to this particular topic by mentioning my most recent trip on SQR whilst on my bike.

I was cycling east on Bishop O'Donnell road & SQR at about 6.30pm on a Tuesday evening a few weeks ago. I was in the bus lane as I didn't want to use the cycle path (due to reasons mentioned by other posters above). Anyway, I got a beep of a horn from behind from the 405 BE bus (at the junction with the Rahoon road). I continued to cycle on and then the bus driver decided to very narrowly overtake me (we were along by the Westside pitches (or what's left of them) at this point). He barely crossed over into the other lane even though it was clear and there were no cars. Naturally I thought 'fcuk that was close, but at least he's gone now'.

Then, as I cycled along by the Westside Recreation Centre, I noticed that the bus wasn't too far ahead of me and he started to slow down for no apparent reason. At this point he had crossed over to the other lane (presumably because he needed to be in the correct lane when approaching the Browne roundabout). The bus driver then stopped the bus as I was coming closer and he unbelievably opened the doors. I decided to stop (I really should have just kept cycling). The bus driver then called me every name under the sun, and said I should be on the cycle path, and said that 'I was giving cyclists a bad name' for being in the bus lane. After about 30 seconds of him ranting at me, he closed the bus doors and drove on. And in case you were wondering, the bus was in service and there were passengers on-board.

What a nutjob.

Iwannahurl · 29-04-2014 08:44AM

dastardly00 wrote: »

The bus driver then called me every name under the sun, and said I should be on the cycle path, and said that 'I was giving cyclists a bad name' for being in the bus lane. After about 30 seconds of him ranting at me, he closed the bus doors and drove on. And in case you were wondering, the bus was in service and there were passengers on-board.

Report the incident to Bus Eireann, giving exact details of time and location, and a general description of the driver.

While you're at it, please ask the BE official what they understand the meaning and status of this sign to be:

Let us know what the Bus Eireann response is!

snubbleste · 29-04-2014 06:23PM

Election posters - Aargh!
I was assaulted by a flailing Cllr Conneely on Newcastle Rd - the top cable tie has unfastened and he's upside down attacking anyone who dares pass.
I mean really all candidates are breaching the poster guidelines, you have to duck to avoid hitting some of them

what_traffic · 29-04-2014 06:31PM

at1withmyself wrote: »

Those new cycle lanes are terrible so I have been using the CYCLE / BUS lane for over a year now although the City Direct Bus Drivers don't seem to understand the law that it is also for bikes and have tried taking me out on a few occasions so be careful. Taxi drivers also like to beep a lot but thankfully that's all they do.

They(Galway City Council) were told before they built it that issues like this would occur.
http://www.galwaycycling.org/city-council-to-spend-e6-million-to-slow-down-city-buses/

joeKel73 · 30-04-2014 01:27PM

snubbleste wrote: »

Election posters - Aargh!

I especially dislike the Cllr Billy Cameron signs which are shaped like road warning signs and placed at junctions. I've seem some on traffic light poles and almost all below the allowed level.

The first item on his list of achievements to date is "Traffic Management". :mad:

Lundar. · 01-05-2014 12:08PM

Hi folks,

These photos are the kind of illegal parking I see a few times a day around G&L/Centra and AIB bank in Newcastle.They tend to block the path and crossing for pedestrians and the turn to the left from snipe avenue. I have rarely seen parking wardens do tickets around here. In the petrol station is the main spot for gardai to refuel their cars(they alway turn a blind eye to this kind of stuff around here). The last 2 photos a Squad car passed by and did nothing.
In Snipe avenue ,there is a Disability centre/School in snipe avenue, Parking like this make it hard for everyone. (It purpose has changed several times in the last 20 years.)

I am not a hater of cars or cycling (I use both equally) but just would like to see better enforce of parking and traffic regulations. Several times i haven't been to get out of Snipe avenue for 10-15 whilst delivery takes place in the morning.

I leave these with ye, i can provide more photos if needed.

what_traffic · 01-05-2014 12:26PM

Lundar. wrote: »

.
..
... The last 2 photos a Squad car passed by and did nothing.
.

That is shocking really that the Gardai did not take action. Blocking a Pelican Pedestrian Crossing and parking on a yellow box and double yellow lines? Are the Gardai just blind to it as it occurs so often in Galway City?

snubbleste · 01-05-2014 12:39PM

what_traffic wrote: »

Are the Gardai just blind to it as it occurs so often in Galway City?

Yes.

joeKel73 · 01-05-2014 01:05PM

Why did you block out their registrations?

It's the same all day every day outside Londis opposite UCHG.

Lundar. · 01-05-2014 01:15PM

Simple mate, I don't want trouble from mods/Legal stuff. This happen all the time outside the centra as well mate.I'm sure its the same in other parts of the city as well.

joeKel73 · 01-05-2014 01:27PM

Yeah it's common all over, those two spots are especially bad.

From a legal / photography point of view there's no issue with showing registrations - photos were taken in a public place. Name and shame (registrations) I say!

gordongekko · 01-05-2014 02:52PM

The traffic warden is in Newcastle daily. Gardai have more to be at than worrying about a car parked on double yellow lines

Iwannahurl · 01-05-2014 03:26PM

gordongekko wrote: »

Gardai have more to be at than worrying about a car parked on double yellow lines

Indeed they must, since they gaily ignore such lawbreaking every day of the year.

Thing is, what do they worry about?

pleasant Co. · 01-05-2014 05:03PM

J o e wrote: »

Yeah it's common all over, those two spots are especially bad.

From a legal / photography point of view there's no issue with showing registrations - photos were taken in a public place. Name and shame (registrations) I say!

As these photos could well be hosted online indefinitely, but ownership of the portrayed reg's will likely change, I foresee a bit of a problem with your name & shame point of view, best to err on the side of caution here.

joeKel73 · 01-05-2014 07:59PM

gordongekko wrote: »

The traffic warden is in Newcastle daily. Gardai have more to be at than worrying about a car parked on double yellow lines

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Thing is, what do they worry about?

Well at the moment they're sitting parked up on the cycle lane at the Tesco end of the Quincentenary Bridge waving in the odd car for presumably speeding (or mobile phone usage).

Iwannahurl · 02-05-2014 09:47AM

pleasant Co. wrote: »

As these photos could well be hosted online indefinitely, but ownership of the portrayed reg's will likely change, I foresee a bit of a problem with your name & shame point of view, best to err on the side of caution here.

An observation -- not an argument -- on that point.

The registration number of a vehicle is not equivalent to a person's name or other identifying feature of an individual.

The parking may be shameful, but the inanimate object causing the obstruction cannot be embarrassed.

The photo, including the publicly displayed reg number, is self-evidently factual at the time the incident was observed. However, it would require a bizarre departure from reason for anyone to claim that some sort of residual guilt is transferred from one person to another when a vehicle changes ownership.

Would we say the same about a house, for example? Maybe some of us identify ourselves too closely with our cars...

pleasant Co. · 02-05-2014 12:01PM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

An observation -- not an argument -- on that point.

The registration number of a vehicle is not equivalent to a person's name or other identifying feature of an individual.

Accurate

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The parking may be shameful, but the inanimate object causing the obstruction cannot be embarrassed.

Accurate

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The photo, including the publicly displayed reg number, is self-evidently factual at the time the incident was observed. However, it would require a bizarre departure from reason for anyone to claim that some sort of residual guilt is transferred from one person to another when a vehicle changes ownership.

Not implied, so irrelevant.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Would we say the same about a house, for example? Maybe some of us identify ourselves too closely with our cars...

irrelevant

I, most likely you, do not know who owns the above cars, that is not to say that somebody browsing would not recognise the reg. As there are plenty of assholes out there, as evident in this very thread, I'd rather "err on the side of caution" rather than have one of these assholes [eg] keying someone's car because they saw a picture of that car parked illegally, with these pictures being online indefinitely who's to say when one of these assholes will see the picture and who the owner of the car is at that time.

what_traffic · 02-05-2014 01:20PM

J o e wrote: »

Well at the moment they're sitting parked up on the cycle lane at the Tesco end of the Quincentenary Bridge waving in the odd car for presumably speeding (or mobile phone usage).

Ya should have reported them to the Gardai. Can imagine the confusion in Millstreet!

It's been done before.

http://irishcycle.com/2014/04/26/gardai-apologise-for-speed-van-parked-in-n11-cycle-path/
"
A Garda Traffic Corps superintendent says the parking of a Garda speed detection van on a cycle path on the busy N11 was “totally unacceptable” and has apologised, according to a councilor who highlighted the poor parking.
"

snubbleste · 18-05-2014 11:43AM

Where is the cycle lane? - approaching Bodkin
pPs2BVjl.jpg?2

Lundar. · 18-05-2014 12:27PM

seen that on a daily basis, i tend to stick to the correct lanes only to find, drivers using the cycle lane to go left and thus cutting up anyone that want to turn left correctly.

Time · 18-05-2014 03:46PM

Lundar. wrote: »

seen that on a daily basis, i tend to stick to the correct lanes only to find, drivers using the cycle lane to go left and thus cutting up anyone that want to turn left correctly.

The drivers are allowed to do that if they're turning left. If your a cyclist you can pass if it's safe to do so or wait your turn.

S.I. No. 332/2012 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012. wrote:

(5)(a) A mechanically propelled vehicle, other than a mechanically propelled wheelchair, shall not be driven along or across a cycle track on the right hand edge of which traffic sign number RRM 022 has been provided, save for the purposes of access to or egress from a place adjacent to the cycle track or from a roadway to such a place.

(b) A reference in paragraph (a) to driving along or across a cycle track shall include a reference to driving wholly or partly along or across a cycle track.

inisboffin · 18-05-2014 07:22PM

Time wrote: »

The drivers are allowed to do that if they're turning left. If your a cyclist you can pass if it's safe to do so or wait your turn.

It's open to interpretation, but doesn't it mean to get access to the adjacent road - coming across the cycle lane to turn? As opposed to being 5 or 6 cars back and driving along it? Does the official path only start at the red in the pic above? If so, then that seems like a fair access, but if the cycle path is also the black, there is no need for cars to enter so far back.

18-05-2014 07:49PM

To whoever was cycling through the Bodkin junction at about three this afternoon, coming from the bridge going towards Headford, who took a picture of a stopped black VW Golf as you were passing - you cycled through a red traffic light and gave my wife and I a scare while we were crossing.

Time · 18-05-2014 07:55PM

inisboffin wrote: »

It's open to interpretation, but doesn't it mean to get access to the adjacent road - coming across the cycle lane to turn? As opposed to being 5 or 6 cars back and driving along it? Does the official path only start at the red in the pic above? If so, then that seems like a fair access, but if the cycle path is also the black, there is no need for cars to enter so far back.

Looking at the picture the cycle lane starts at the red marking. There are no solid white or broken lines to indicate a cycle lane before that. So drivers are entitled to drive as close to the kerb as they like.

When the drivers get to the cycle lane they're entitled to keep left, and cross the cycle lane as per the statute I quoted as the cycle lane has broken white lines. The caveat is as long as it's safe to do so . Cyclists don't have an automatic right of way here if drivers are ahead and safely moving across the cycle lane

Lundar. · 18-05-2014 08:58PM

snubbleste wrote: »

Where is the cycle lane? - approaching Bodkin

actually there is, just that the cars are parked on top of it.

joeKel73 · 19-05-2014 09:12AM

Time wrote: »

When the drivers get to the cycle lane they're entitled to keep left, and cross the cycle lane as per the statute I quoted as the cycle lane has broken white lines. The caveat is as long as it's safe to do so . Cyclists don't have an automatic right of way here if drivers are ahead and safely moving across the cycle lane

I don't think the issue is cars crossing the cycle lane when it is safe to do so, this is obviously necessary to access the left slip road. The problem is cars stopping along and across the cycle lane when there isn't space to progress through. Or slowly crawly across when there are cyclists coming up the lane who would have passed before the car could finish crossing the lane.

If you were taking a right-turn onto a road that's backed up you would wait until it's clear rather than stop your car across the opposing lane of traffic.

Lundar. · 19-05-2014 10:10AM

one is filter lane for turning left and the other is straight ahead and i think turn left also?. The filter lane on the left , goes green 5 secs or so ahead of the other lights. which might be encouraging this behaviour.

joeKel73 · 19-05-2014 10:18AM

Lundar. wrote: »

one is filter lane for turning left and the other is straight ahead and i think turn left also?. The filter lane on the left , goes green 5 secs or so ahead of the other lights. which might be encouraging this behaviour.

Not sure what you mean. To clarify - there is one slip lane coming off the main road from the bridge which you have to cross the cycle path to enter. After the branch off this splits into two lanes. The lights for these two lanes goes green while traffic is green coming from Dunnes approach and remains green as the traffic from the bridge is green (no left turn at main junction).

what_traffic · 19-05-2014 05:56PM

Lundar. wrote: »

actually there is, just that the cars are parked on top of it.

One Solution to stop this ignorant and illegal behaviour would be to install plastic bollards alongside the cycle lane(to the right - on the solid white line) and have it terminate were the red cycle paint begins and the broken white line starts. This is the section that other vechicles can cross into the left filter(hence the broken white line)

Time · 20-05-2014 01:36PM

Lundar. wrote: »

actually there is, just that the cars are parked on top of it.

With a solid white line no less, motorists in the wrong there so, no question

Time · 20-05-2014 01:38PM

what_traffic wrote: »

One Solution to stop this ignorant and illegal behaviour would be to install plastic bollards alongside the cycle lane(to the right - on the solid white line) and have it terminate were the red cycle paint begins and the broken white line starts. This is the section that other vechicles can cross into the left filter(hence the broken white line)

They ideally would have taken in the footpath another foot and had a kerb alongside the cycle path completely separating it from traffic. Is there a filter cycle lane that goes left before the lights?

Time · 20-05-2014 01:42PM

J o e wrote: »

I don't think the issue is cars crossing the cycle lane when it is safe to do so, this is obviously necessary to access the left slip road. The problem is cars stopping along and across the cycle lane when there isn't space to progress through. <b> Or slowly crawly across when there are cyclists coming up the lane who would have passed before the car could finish crossing the lane.</b>

If you were taking a right-turn onto a road that's backed up you would wait until it's clear rather than stop your car across the opposing lane of traffic.

There's the real problem, your actually allowed to stop halfway across the cycle lane with the broken white line, if you intend on going left, which impedes the flow of cyclists.

PS: sorry for all the replies, not sure how to multi-quote

Iwannahurl · 19-06-2014 07:28PM

I spotted this bike parking arrangement outside NUI Galway premises in Nuns Island recently.

An efficient use of space, or a sneaky imposition on disabled drivers?

Lundar. · 19-06-2014 07:30PM

is it on the footpath ?

Iwannahurl · 20-06-2014 12:56AM

The footpath ends just before the disabled parking spot.

EDIT: fixed my post above to make it clear that I am referring to the inclusion of two bike parking stands in a disabled parking bay.

dastardly00 · 20-06-2014 10:34AM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The footpath ends just before the disabled parking spot.

EDIT: fixed my post above to make it clear that I am referring to the inclusion of two bike parking stands in a disabled parking bay.

Before the entrance to that building was renovated, there were tonnes of bike spaces/metal stands (to the right in your first photo). They must be gone now because of the wheelchair access ramp?

Disabled spots are bigger than normal spaces, so those bike stands either side of the disabled spot are maybe an efficient use of space.

Iwannahurl · 20-06-2014 10:41AM

As shown in the second photo, there is plenty of space around that could be used for bike parking.

The question is whether the two bike stands encroach on the disabled parking bay. Offhand I don't know what the statutory requirements are in terms of minimum dimensions -- I must look it up.

My gut feeling is that it's an inappropriate use of the disabled parking space, given the other options just a few metres away.

Zillah · 20-06-2014 10:44AM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

As shown in the second photo, there is plenty of space around that could be used for bike parking.

The question is whether the two bike stands encroach on the disabled parking bay. Offhand I don't know what the statutory requirements are in terms of minimum dimensions -- I must look it up.

My gut feeling is that it's an inappropriate use of the disabled parking space, given the other options just a few metres away.

It does look a bit like they wouldn't leave much room at the doors, which kind of defeats the whole purpose. I wouldn't want to be trying to squeeze a wheelchair between an open car door and a pair of locked bikes like that, or trying to help a frail elderly person.

Iwannahurl · 20-06-2014 10:48AM

Zillah wrote: »

It does look a bit like they wouldn't leave much room at the doors, which kind of defeats the whole purpose. I wouldn't want to be trying to squeeze a wheelchair between an open car door and a pair of locked bikes like that, or trying to help a frail elderly person.

That's my feeling too, but it may also be the case that the space is generously proportioned, exceeding the statutory dimensions by a big enough margin.

Still, even if it could be regarded as clever use of space, my preference would be to site a bigger number of bike parking stands in the spaces available close by.

Essentially the current arrangement requires disabled drivers and cyclists to compromise in order to save space, which is not the way it should be imo.

snubbleste · 20-06-2014 11:34AM

That site was double bike stands before. And it was turned into a disabled parking spot.
I guess the idea is that the car can reverse into the spot.

CramCycle · 20-06-2014 11:46AM

snubbleste wrote: »

That site was double bike stands before. And it was turned into a disabled parking spot.
I guess the idea is that the car can reverse into the spot.

Some wheel chair users or disabled drivers may be getting a lift and their chair is in the rear seat or boot, therefore making reversing into the spot and even bigger obstacle.

pleasant Co. · 21-06-2014 12:52AM

CramCycle wrote: »

Some wheel chair users or disabled drivers may be getting a lift and their chair is in the rear seat or boot, therefore making reversing into the spot and even bigger obstacle.

You've suggested that they may be getting a lift, therefore the logical thing to do would be for the person giving the lift to park front first rather than reverse park - it would be a mighty obstacle for a boot entering/exiting passenger to be backed up against a wall alright.

It does seem rather pointless, stupid even, to have bike racks either side of the disabled parking spot when they could just as easily be two abreast on one side only.

snubbleste · 21-06-2014 09:40AM

The space appears extra long. Iwannahurl, you need to get a tape and measure it to be sure..

Iwannahurl · 21-06-2014 11:50AM

snubbleste wrote: »

The space appears extra long. Iwannahurl, you need to get a tape and measure it to be sure..

Tis the width I'm concerned about, Snubs. Although if it's extra long it might mean that the bike racks might not get in the way of car doors.

pleasant Co. wrote: »

It does seem rather pointless, stupid even, to have bike racks either side of the disabled parking spot when they could just as easily be two abreast on one side only.

In fact, given the alternative spaces that could be used for bike parking nearby, siting the racks near the disabled parking space seems to be entirely unnecessary.

what_traffic · 23-06-2014 12:00PM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In fact, given the alternative spaces that could be used for bike parking nearby, siting the racks near the disabled parking space seems to be entirely unnecessary.

Which came first - the chicken or the egg? Believe the bike parking was there first - maybe was just lazyiness in not rermoving these two stands when creating this disabled bay or else they did not want to convert an existing parking bay to a bike parking bay when the other stands were removed? It's a half arsed job in any case.

CramCycle · 23-06-2014 01:07PM

pleasant Co. wrote: »

You've suggested that they may be getting a lift, therefore the logical thing to do would be for the person giving the lift to park front first rather than reverse park - it would be a mighty obstacle for a boot entering/exiting passenger to be backed up against a wall alright.

It does seem rather pointless, stupid even, to have bike racks either side of the disabled parking spot when they could just as easily be two abreast on one side only.

My point was that if they park nose first, their front door may hit the bikes while attempting to open them so it makes no difference where their WC is (in the boot or a small/light lift over one. Reverse in and if someone else is retrieving the WC then they will struggle and they will also have difficulty backing up to close their front door it its one of the light lift over ones.

Iwannahurl · 23-06-2014 03:24PM

what_traffic wrote: »

Which came first - the chicken or the egg? Believe the bike parking was there first - maybe was just lazyiness in not rermoving these two stands when creating this disabled bay or else they did not want to convert an existing parking bay to a bike parking bay when the other stands were removed? It's a half arsed job in any case.

This was the situation in 2009. It seems that there are a couple of bike stands.

I suspect you are spot on regarding the conversion of both designated and 'de facto' car parking spaces to bike parking. Clearly there are several such spaces nearby, but my guess is that the idea never even entered their minds.

snubbleste · 23-06-2014 03:56PM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

This was the situation in 2009. ...

Observe how the cars in 2009 fit the space
and then compare the 2014 space which extends past the adjacent footpath - hence my theory that the space is too long *smug*

Iwannahurl · 23-06-2014 08:54PM

Chapter 7 of the Department of Transport's Road Signs Manual 2010 specifies the minimum dimensions of disabled parking bays.

Width (when perpendicular to the kerbline): 2.4 metres
Depth: 6m
Buffer zone on both sides: 1.2m

That's a VW Caddy van in the 2009 StreetView image. The Caddy is between 4.4 and 4.9 metres in length overall, depending on model.

I don't think this particular disabled parking bay is too long/deep, but it seems to be the case that NUIG has inappropriately annexed part of the regulation 1.2m buffer zone to bung in a couple of token bike stands.

The addition of a disabled parking bay is an improvement, but NUIG should have given more thought to bike parking provision.

Cycling/Walking around the city

Comments